# China and Korea

• News

## Greater threat to world peace?

• ### USA?

• Total voters
15
Nereid
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
to points made by Ivan, Pollly, kat, ... - perceived hypocrisy

The global superpower which insists on democracy ... but refuses to accept the views of the majority when it don't like it (e.g. Kyoto).

... which trumpets 'the rule of law', but denies any law but its own (e.g. ICC), or flounts legal decisions of bodies it happily uses to ram its interests through otherwise (e.g. WTO)

... which insists on 'free trade', but happily denies the benefits of just that to partners and strangers alike (e.g. west African cotton farmers, Australian sugar growers, Korean steel producers, ....)

... cynically changes the 'ground rules' in mid-game on IPR, to exploit ('arbitrage') LDCs' weak IPR infrastructure (many examples).

Of course none of this behaviour is surprising, given that the prime objective of all nations' foreign affairs is national self-interest. However, what's galling is the degree to which the marketing machine has sugar-coated the naked self-interest in fine-sounding phrases and appeals to worthy ideals. Worse, lots of upright US citizens have bought the story and can't see how hypocritical they appear.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Kyoto was a flawed plan that was rightly rejected by the US and the CIS who would have been harmed by it without providing any real benefits to the rest of the world (as their own analysis showed). I am not aware of any existing system of justice under which a majority of countries ratifying a treaty means that other countries are required to obey that treaty. We haven't quite got to global dictatorship of the majority yet.

Likewise the ICC is another treaty which the US has refused to sign. That doesn't mean they are undemocratic, because nations have a perfect right to reject treaties.

In fact what I see from your post is that you believe democracy is the same as bureaucratic tyranny, as is becoming more and more obvious in the EU.

Nader said he is jumping into the race to "challenge the two-party duopoly" that is allowing Washington to be "corporate-occupied territory."

...

"The liberal intelligentsia," Nader said, "has allowed its party to become a captive of corporate interests."

Washington is "corporate-occupied territory," Nader said. "We need more political and civic energies inside the campaign to challenge this two-party duopoly that's trending toward one-party districts all over the country."

Took about two seconds on a search engine.

Njorl said:
I actually don't think China will invade Taiwan. They wish to "Finlandise" it. It is worthless to them as a shattered wreck. They want to swallow it whole, and use it as a purely capitalist appendage to support the mainland.

Njorl
The unification has more to do with vanity. Our leaders want to go down in history as the one who units China. Since 10 years ago, Taiwanese businessmen started pulling their expertise and capital away from Taiwan and pouring them into the Southern coastal provinces and that is why Taiwanese economy has been ailing with no prospect of recovery. And Hong Kong, is fast dwindling into the Chicago of China.

Took about two seconds on a search engine.

You know, instead of continuing to make yourself look foolish, why don't you stop TRYING to prove me wrong/stupid/etc. as your sole point for being here?

No where in your post is there even the quote that Ivan and myself are speaking about.

Polly said:
The unification has more to do with vanity. Our leaders want to go down in history as the one who units China. Since 10 years ago, Taiwanese businessmen started pulling their expertise and capital away from Taiwan and pouring them into the Southern coastal provinces and that is why Taiwanese economy has been ailing with no prospect of recovery. And Hong Kong, is fast dwindling into the Chicago of China.
Our? you are chinese? Taiwanese (depending on your politics, if you don't mind me calling you that as a nationality)?

Either case, do you also feel that Taiwan is a idealogical slap in the face to mainland China?

Nereid
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
phatmonky said:
Our? you are chinese? Taiwanese (depending on your politics, if you don't mind me calling you that as a nationality)?

Either case, do you also feel that Taiwan is a idealogical slap in the face to mainland China?
I think Polly lives in Hong Kong, which is a special administrative region within the People's Republic of China.

kat
Zero said:
Are your numbers representative of the relative size of the corporations, or are they misleading(intentionally or not)? In other words, are the total dollar amounts done by the Danish companies greater than those of America?

Transnational corporations (parents) (per capita)
1. Denmark 1737.61 per 1 million people
2. Israel 708.57 per 1 million people
3. Switzerland 615.68 per 1 million people
4. Sweden 576.47 per 1 million people
5. Iceland 277.77 per 1 million people

The U.S. falls in at 25th

Transnational corporations (parents) (per $GDP) 1. Denmark 6.02e-06 per$100
2. Israel 3.69e-06 per $100 3. Sweden 2.21e-06 per$100
4. Switzerland 1.93e-06 per $100 5. Iceland 9.23e-07 per$100

The U.S. falls in at 34th

http://www.nationmaster.com/

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Oh come on Kat. What are the GDP's and populations of those countries compared to the US?

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
phatmonky said:
Perhaps you can show me where he said this, since you are the only result I have ever found of this statement..
"Washington is now a corporate-occupied territory."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4304155/

Close enough but I was pretty sure that I got the quote right. I'm not sure if I missed the mark a little, perhaps while trying to write while still listening, or if the interview has been cleaned up a little...not sure.

For the remainder of the board who aren't absolutely worthless:
You figured out how to get threads you don't like locked. Bravo.
Now, several times at least one person has brought up the idea that China and North Korea are possible threats. Personally I can think of another country which has attacked and invaded other countries far more often over the past century or so. But why would these two be considered a threat to any other nation?
The truth is, they're both dangerous. China and North Korea are both totalitarian expansionist regiemes, but benefit enough from free trade which requires regional stability that they don't attack and conquer as much as they are capable of. Under rational leadership, the US is similar- a relatively benign economic superpower. It's just that sometimes, insane people grab power and threaten to turn the clock back, because their friends or ideologies benefit from war. Weighing the threat from the USA with Korea and China, you have to look at what they do, not simply what you think their intentions are.

Zero
kat said:
Transnational corporations (parents) (per capita)
1. Denmark 1737.61 per 1 million people
2. Israel 708.57 per 1 million people
3. Switzerland 615.68 per 1 million people
4. Sweden 576.47 per 1 million people
5. Iceland 277.77 per 1 million people

The U.S. falls in at 25th

Transnational corporations (parents) (per $GDP) 1. Denmark 6.02e-06 per$100
2. Israel 3.69e-06 per $100 3. Sweden 2.21e-06 per$100
4. Switzerland 1.93e-06 per $100 5. Iceland 9.23e-07 per$100

The U.S. falls in at 34th

http://www.nationmaster.com/

That's still misleading. Good try, though, and thanks for the stats and the link.

You figured out how to get threads you don't like locked. Bravo.
.
We're on page three, not locked, and I'm still going strong. Nice assumption.

Zero
phatmonky said:
We're on page three, not locked, and I'm still going strong. Nice assumption.

Nereid
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
*SNIP

The truth is, they're both dangerous. China and North Korea are both totalitarian expansionist regiemes, but benefit enough from free trade which requires regional stability that they don't attack and conquer as much as they are capable of. Under rational leadership, the US is similar- a relatively benign economic superpower. It's just that sometimes, insane people grab power and threaten to turn the clock back, because their friends or ideologies benefit from war. Weighing the threat from the USA with Korea and China, you have to look at what they do, not simply what you think their intentions are.
Evidence? North Korean nuclear powered and nuclear armed subs in the Gulf of Mexico? Chinese Red Army bases in Andorra? I think not.

Zero said:
Hey now, I've done my best to be a productive input to this thread. He made the assumption and comment to me. I was well on topic my captain :tongue:

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Zero said:
That's still misleading. Good try, though, and thanks for the stats and the link.

Why is it misleading? What part of "The US isn't doing that" don't you get?

phatmonky said:
You know, instead of continuing to make yourself look foolish, why don't you stop TRYING to prove me wrong/stupid/etc. as your sole point for being here?

No where in your post is there even the quote that Ivan and myself are speaking about.
Second post on second page:
Ivan Seeking: "From the hopeless second runner up in the presidential election this year - Ralph Nader: "Corporations now occupy Washington"

Phatmonky: "Perhaps you can show me where he said this, since you are the only result I have ever found of this statement."
You lacked information, and commented about it. I provided that information. Get over it.

Second post on second page:

You lacked information, and commented about it. I provided that information. Get over it.
Hiss Hiss, Whine Whine....get off my nuts. THat's not the quote.

And to keep this on track....
Are you planning on answer the tibet and starvation questions that no one wants to touch?

Last edited:
Njorl

Njorl

Wasn't he the Greatest American Hero?